Intel Processors to Become OS Locked(soylentnews.org)
soylentnews.org
Intel Processors to Become OS Locked
http://soylentnews.org/articles/14/03/15/1912255.shtml
13 comments
The Golem article actually only writes about the hooks of the Android OS for x86 (I can't find any mention of the processor!) but it also has the example of not allowing modded Android OS at the end of it (translated via Google Translate with minor fixes for clarity attempted by me):
"The Intel manager gave an example for why such safety features, deeply anchored into the operating system are important for Android: In the Intel network only mobile devices with certain versions of Android may use all functions. The Cyanogenmod smartphone would be able to access WLAN but not receive e-mails as such a device would be a security risk."
"The Intel manager gave an example for why such safety features, deeply anchored into the operating system are important for Android: In the Intel network only mobile devices with certain versions of Android may use all functions. The Cyanogenmod smartphone would be able to access WLAN but not receive e-mails as such a device would be a security risk."
If I could give it a shot... (Good translation but it looks like you missed a sentence)
> In the case of x86 Android, Intel plans, among other things, to allow file operations to be monitored by virus scanners by way of hooks. Such hooks would allow new files to be scanned, for example, without the Anti-Malware and Operating System having to go through what were, until now, the usual paths over the filesystem.
> In the case of x86 Android, Intel plans, among other things, to allow file operations to be monitored by virus scanners by way of hooks. Such hooks would allow new files to be scanned, for example, without the Anti-Malware and Operating System having to go through what were, until now, the usual paths over the filesystem.
Take this with a grain of salt.
The referring Google+ post comes from a German site that seems to be the only reference to said 'locking' and the hypothetical postulated in the link above is purely conjecture.
The referring Google+ post comes from a German site that seems to be the only reference to said 'locking' and the hypothetical postulated in the link above is purely conjecture.
It would appear more than one reference exists:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-s-64-Bit-Mobile-Chips-W...
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-s-64-Bit-Mobile-Chips-W...
Well I know what I won't be buying.
Sorry Intel you want my money you'll have to let me do whatever the hell i want with the hardware once i purchase it.
Sorry Intel you want my money you'll have to let me do whatever the hell i want with the hardware once i purchase it.
Stop with those sketchy over-three-corners, (foreign language article)->(social network post)->(forum post) already. The original article on golem.de talks about kernel hooks. NOTHING about processors except for less utilization b/c hooks allow to circumvent the FS layer so e.g. net->virusscan->fs-n instead of net->fs-in->fs-out->virusscan.
Lol, this is complete garbage. It is so far from the truth the author must have known they were lying.
German here: In the referenced golem article is only said that intel locks out android based smartphones from their own company network for security reasons, if they don't have anti virus scanners installed.
Time for a crowd funded OpenSPARC / ARM based CPU semiconductor fab ?
Crowd funding is great for many things, but not for a fab. We're talking >$1 BILLION in capital per plant required just to replicate existing technology (not even to begin innovating). Still, if you can raise $1B in a crowdfund, we'd love to know your secrets!
You don't need the fab, you hire one of the existing ones to build it for you. nVidia does this for example (and ATI did as well)
You can license the ARM IP from a company as well (I mean, not just the instruction set IP but the actual implementation as well)
You can license the ARM IP from a company as well (I mean, not just the instruction set IP but the actual implementation as well)
I doubt that the poster is proposing to build the plant, so much as build the CPU in a plant.
simple, lets start a government.
They already have locked processors for mobile chips. Try getting a non-bootloader locked Medfield device (tablet, phone…) So does every ARM SoC vendor. Nothing new here, sadly, as I think any device you buy should be yours to modify (and that means unlocking the bootloader.)
What is with the domain? Are they trying to cash in on the word soylent?
This is one of the Slashdot Replacement sites (the? main one) arising from the "F#^% Beta" movement. They may or may not be called SoylentNews for long, there is some drama surrounding the domain name and a founder/former co-maintainer who has sold the domain name to (who appears to be) a benevolent/benefactor called matt_ from the userbase.
Intel's not this stupid... come on.
I agree with you. This doesn't make any sense from a financial perspective for Intel.
Time to change to new archs
Yeah and it is going to be future and hacker proof as well. So I heard!! :)
http://www.golem.de/news/intel-hooks-im-kernel-sollen-androi...
> Im Fall des x86-Android plant Intel unter anderem, Dateioperationen von Virenscannern per Hooks zu ermöglichen. Damit können dann zum Beispiel in Echtzeit nur neue Dateien gescannt werden, ohne dass die Anti-Malware und das Betriebssystem die bisher üblichen Wege über das Dateisystem gehen müssen.
Which loosely translates as:
> In Android x86's case, Intel plans as well as other things, file operations could be monitored via process hooks designed for anti-virus. It would be done with only new files in real-time without relying directly on the OS.
Nowhere does this indicate to me that it locks you into an OS and chances are that it can be disabled within the firmware.